This is Rogifan's standard M.O. Make some bombastic, inflammatory statement, then fall deathly silent when called to back up her "theories."
The Girl Who Cried Wolf? Maybe.
It's a tiresome ploy, one that really contributes to the relentless devaluation of this site's forum quality. Have you read the MacRumors comment forum recently? It is appalling.
Where have I been deathly silent on this thread? And what the hell is inflammatory about suggesting that Apple sometimes leaks to the media? I'm surprised anyone here finds that shocking.
Where have I been deathly silent on this thread? And what the hell is inflammatory about suggesting that Apple sometimes leaks to the media? I'm surprised anyone here finds that shocking.
Yes, Apple occasionally leaks the dates and times of media events to Jim Dalrymple who comments with a simple "Yep."
That's about the nature of Apple's deliberate leaks, stuff that doesn't matter.
Remember, this is company where confidential projects are draped in black cloth for transport on their own campus between secured labs.
I didn't say you are silent on this thread, I just noted that you clam up real quick when you are called out to prove your points.
Well, let's put this to the test.
Please provide evidence that Apple intentionally leaks meaningful material to the general public.
You talk the talk, let's see you walk the walk. Show us the money.
Adding to a firestorm of rumors surrounding Apple's supposed electric car project, a report on Thursday claims the Cupertino tech giant is gunning for a manufacturing start date of 2020.
I’m sorry, why are we still repeating this nonsense when we have proof the cars are just for mapping?
Do you not think Tesla can do a good enough job developing an electric car? What can Apple do differently?
I think Tesla is doing a great job developing an electric car. The problem I see isn't with Tesla, but with Tesla's power to evoke radical change as a whole. We need charging stations to be as common as gas stations, as well as the charging to be much faster. I believe if Apple got into this business it would help push the envelope in this area.
Note, CarPlay is not supported by Tesla, and I have to imagine that Tesla owners are probably very keen on Apple's products. Seems excessive to think Apple is making a car because of that or Apple is "leaking" they will compete with Tesla just to get CarPlay support, but I also can't help but wonder that if I was running Apple and what looks like a long-term future for the automobile was starring me in the face and it wasn't allowing me to enter, I might want to develop a strategy to change that.
Have you read the MacRumors comment forum recently? It is appalling.
Lately? I'm not sure that site ever had a good forum. The only times I ever post there are when there simple, blog-esque posts hit the web well before AI's staff writes up a more comprehensive article.
1) As I noted, you said they should leak a story, with an implication that they are obviously not leaking these stories. My repeated questions and statement to you are about how you can possibly know anything about what they are leaking and not leaking.
2) Can you really be that dense? I never said Apple or big companies don't leak anything on purpose or by accident. I said that you have ZERO evidence to make such a claim as fact. I even gave you an out by showing how you can state it reasonably as a hypothesis.
3) Honestly, I can't stand any of the iNames from Apple, not a big fan of podcasts, and definitely don't care for poorly made podcasts about tech (e.g.: Gruber's "The Talk Show") so I'm definitely not going to listen to a bunch of pricks in a podcast about some unsubstantiated rumours. If you want some real insight I believe this forum has the best members for helping the truth come out (e.g.: recent posts by [@]Geospatial[/@]).
Ah so because you can't stand podcasts, or ones you deem "poorly made" they're just to be discredited. Got it. Whatever. I stand by my statement that if Apple wanted these car rumors to die down they could easily make it happen.
Yes, Apple occasionally leaks the dates and times of media events to Jim Dalrymple who comments with a simple "Yep."
That's about the nature of Apple's deliberate leaks, stuff that doesn't matter.
Remember, this is company where confidential projects are draped in black cloth for transport on their own campus between secured labs.
I didn't say you are silent on this thread, I just noted that you clam up real quick when you are called out to prove your points.
Well, let's put this to the test.
Please provide evidence that Apple intentionally leaks meaningful material to the general public.
You talk the talk, let's see you walk the walk. Show us the money.
Now you're putting words in my mouth. When did I ever say meaningful material? But if you want some examples:
Last year there was a rumor that Apple was going to release a new ?TV in March. We got a "nope" from Jim Dalrymple. I think it's pretty obvious who that "nope "came from.
I've been working on a new joke -- about NFC and a new secure enclave where you can store your credit cards, so you can pay for things at brick and mortar retail stores just by taking out your iPhone, but only if it's one of the new iPhones -- but no one seems to get my sense of humor.
"Follow-up joke: It would be cool, and would make a lot of sense, if the new wearable thing had the same magic payment apparatus."
Again seems very obvious where that information came from.
Until they can overcome the problems inherent to electric cars, they won't achieve the extensive market they have with their mobile devices.
Some problems with electric cars:
1. Total mileage is very limited compared to fossil fuels. You need to be able to do 400 or 500 miles on a charge.
2. Charging takes ages. When you can charge in three minutes, it'll be comparable to gas.
3. The battery is extremely heavy and bulky. This means that boots are tiny.
4. The battery has to be replaced frequently at great expense and time. No such problem with gas.
5. Where do you charge your car? In the UK, at least, this is very limited. Forget charging at home. A large proportion of people live in apartments and leave their car on the street. To my mind, this is the biggest obstacle to electric cars—there is no infrastructure, nor any easy way to solve that problem. This is why charging times need to come down to five minutes or fewer.
6. Electric cars are much more expensive than normal ones. Total overall lifetime cost, as well as initial cost, is still much higher than for equivalent gas cars. There is virtually no market for them, save for small city cars, though they have become less visible in London in the past few years.
One would expect Apple to build the most attractive electric car that you could wish for. If anyone can make them popular, they surely can. However, transforming the infrastructure is a monumental undertaking that is out of their hands. The only way to solve the charge problem, to my mind, is to hugely reduce the charge time. It sounds, from the recent rumours, that Apple are concentrating on battery tech.
I'd love an electric Apple Car; I guess Cook and Ive like a challenge!
Top creative talent after awhile get bored of doing iPhone, after iPhone, after iPhone. Maybe this is a way to keep top talent from leaving and also a way to attract more top talent from other companies to Apple. When you get as big as Apple, talent retention becomes one of your biggest, if not biggest problem.
Now you're putting words in my mouth. When did I ever say meaningful material? But if you want some examples:
Last year there was a rumor that Apple was going to release a new ?TV in March. We got a "nope" from Jim Dalrymple. I think it's pretty obvious who that "nope "came from.
In August John Gruber said: (speculative stuff about NFC which had been widely rumored, given the presence of Touch ID).
Again seems very obvious where that information came from.
Nope on both scenarios; neither instance proves that Apple fed these two information.
Many of us here have previously called you out before on your inability to provide suitable evidence for your inane "theories" and now you are finally reacting, although ineptly.
Remember, most rumors end up being false, so if Dalrymple says "nope" to any given Apple TV rumor (or any other Apple-related rumor for that matter), he will most likely be correct.
That's why Dalrymple's "yeps" are amusing. They are usually correct, but almost exclusively for points that are essentially meaningless, like media event dates, most of which are restricted to certain timeframes and dates anyhow based on fiscal quarters, development cycles, etc.
Gruber has a more confident public demeanor, but it doesn't mean he knows anything more than any other hack. Touch ID had already been around since the iPhone 5S, so it is only logical that Apple would be working on NFC payments (which had been widely rumored for months prior to the iPhone 6/6 Plus launch).
Dalrymple is essentially a reporter; he doesn't speculate much. Gruber is a blogger, he speculates all the time.
You are going to have to do better than that, Rogifan. You're not an *ANAL*yst like Gene Munster.
Your posts are not just viewed by skepticism by me. Others have also taken you to task, and you have never shown any real ability to stand by major points that you make in these forums. You have devalued your own voice based on your inability to back up what you write.
Worse, you are reacting poorly to highly pointed criticism, and offering even more atrocious responses.
But hey, feel free to go nuts. Or you can just shut down, just like you usually do at some point.
Ah so because you can't stand podcasts, or ones you deem "poorly made" they're just to be discredited. Got it. Whatever. I stand by my statement that if Apple wanted these car rumors to die down they could easily make it happen.
1) Did I say I can't stand podcasts. I suppose if you edited my comment to read, "Honestly, I can't stand any […] podcasts," it would read that way, but that would be disingenuous on your part. As I clearly stated, I'm not a big fan. There are only a couple I listen to, and even those are sparingly.
2) I'm not saying that there isn't truthful or good information in the podcast, but show me a podcast that doesn't already have all the relevant info about tech rumours in an article. Chances are they are just speculating on what they read.
3) Again, the statement you stand by is fucking ridiculous because it's obvious Apple could leak info if they wanted. The difference is there is no evidence to support your absolute claims that they do or your myopic view that Apple should let us know about all rumours that aren't true, which would then mean all they don't denounce are true. Remember when they used to send cease and desist letters to websites for posting images of unreleased products? I do, and I'm guessing they stopped doing that years ago for very simple and obvious reasons.
As I clearly stated, I’m… …a big fa… …T… …li… …ar… …there isn’t truthful or good information in the podcast… …are… …you… …fucking… … A… …w… …h… …or… …e… …or your m… …o… …th.. …er… …? …I’m guessing… …e… …i… …th… …er…
Seems a bit harsh. And yes, those are all in order.
Until they can overcome the problems inherent to electric cars, they won't achieve the extensive market they have with their mobile devices.
Some problems with electric cars:
1. Total mileage is very limited compared to fossil fuels. You need to be able to do 400 or 500 miles on a charge.
2. Charging takes ages. When you can charge in three minutes, it'll be comparable to gas.
3. The battery is extremely heavy and bulky. This means that boots are tiny.
4. The battery has to be replaced frequently at great expense and time. No such problem with gas.
5. Where do you charge your car? In the UK, at least, this is very limited. Forget charging at home. A large proportion of people live in apartments and leave their car on the street. To my mind, this is the biggest obstacle to electric cars—there is no infrastructure, nor any easy way to solve that problem. This is why charging times need to come down to five minutes or fewer.
6. Electric cars are much more expensive than normal ones. Total overall lifetime cost, as well as initial cost, is still much higher than for equivalent gas cars. There is virtually no market for them, save for small city cars, though they have become less visible in London in the past few years.
One would expect Apple to build the most attractive electric car that you could wish for. If anyone can make them popular, they surely can. However, transforming the infrastructure is a monumental undertaking that is out of their hands. The only way to solve the charge problem, to my mind, is to hugely reduce the charge time. It sounds, from the recent rumours, that Apple are concentrating on battery tech.
I'd love an electric Apple Car; I guess Cook and Ive like a challenge!
If you applied to Apple when Steve Jobs was around I guess he would have taken one look at you and booted your behind all the way back to Britain
wow - If most Brits are as positive about overcoming obstacles as you are its no surprise very few companies got started in Britain
Your post sounds like a list of excuses not to do anything.
If you applied to Apple when Steve Jobs was around I guess he would have taken one look at you and booted your behind all the way back to Britain
wow - If most Brits are as positive about overcoming obstacles as you are its no surprise very few companies got started in Britain
Your post sounds like a list of excuses not to do anything.
Some of the ridiculousness of the post you quoted are…
Few road vehicles get 400-500 miles on a tank of gas now, yet an electric car needs to go 400-500 miles.
Few road vehicles can fill up a tank of gas within 3 minutes, yet an electric car needs to charge in 3 minutes.
Boots are tiny, despite the motor and gas tank taking up considerable space in modern cars.
Electric cars are too costly to ever replace the internal combustion engine.
At first it just sounds like someone who isn't thinking it through, but then the level of detail for the idiocy tells me it has to be blatant trolling.
I don't really believe Apple would choose to make a car. If they did however, it would have to be the most sexy, beautiful, riveting vehicle anyone has ever seen. If it was not, it would be considered a fail by all the naysayers, the stock would tank massively and the project would likely fail.
The stakes may be too high even for Apple. We know how people gin up unreasonable expectations for regular Apple products. Just imagine how out of control it would be for a car. Seems like a good way for Apple to hurt themselves.
If Apple isn't going to make a car, they should say so. If for no other reason than to stop all the perpetual motion inventors from beating on their door...
Now you're putting words in my mouth. When did I ever say meaningful material? But if you want some examples:
Last year there was a rumor that Apple was going to release a new ?TV in March. We got a "nope" from Jim Dalrymple. I think it's pretty obvious who that "nope "came from.
Again seems very obvious where that information came from.
You're way off base on gruber. I read all his posts, tweets, and listened to all his podcasts. The origin of the "joke" stuff was his sarcastic comment about some other crappy android watch, that it would be funny if it didn't even come out before apple's. For whatevwe reason people inferred that he knew when it was coming. He didn't and said so. He's stated time and time again that he has little birdies but that Apple itself doesn't leak to him special secrets, just early review models like everyone else.
In fact, the one thing that keeps me wishing Apple is building a car is because of how much opportunity there is to make this industry work because of the gains had by moving to an all-electric automobile. Of course, my wishful thinking has a lot more to do with getting the infrastructure designed so that it can be built up with ease (see ?Pay), particularly a way that a battery can be recharged — not replaced — within 10 minutes.
These all-electric cars are incredibly simple in comparison to the current automobiles with combustions. I forget who used the term on these forums, but they referred to the Tesla as solid-state. While not completely accurate, I do think it's a great term for a tech forum to help get the idea across of the advantages that will be had with electric autos.
That's the frame, with suspension, tires, batteries and motors right there. To me, that's beautiful with a future-forward elegance, so I can understand why people want Apple to get into this business.
I agree with your points here. Electric vehicles are in the news basically because one man and one (small) company had the fortitude to build an electric only (high-performance) production car. I can only imagine how much Apple would contribute to the art... and Musk would welcome Apple to the game. This is right for Apple. Musk has had to walk a very fine line in every aspect of the design and implementation of his electric vehicles. How clever to start with a body built be a recognised high-end (and at the time, probably struggling) marque and then migrate to their own vehicle, brilliant. The outward appearance has had to match design expectations (with the low plan, Tesla could have gone for a more space efficient cab-forward design) and prove a point in performance. Again, brilliant execution. As on-the-road infrastructure improves, with the increasing uptake of electric vehicles, standardisation in some aspects of design could be introduced such that batteries for different manufacturers could be swapped out in a single facility, something that might take seconds to minutes. Musk wants every component to be recyclable. Recycling battery chemicals etc could lower costs dramatically. Those familiar with his goals for SpaceX would understand this. (My understanding is that he is already more cost efficient with systems built in the US than the Chinese.)
I hope the Tesla succeeds and that big money comes to the game. I hope too that autonomous vehicles succeed and that motor vehicle deaths become rare. I believe that people who've contributed most to the safety built into vehicle design are those who were most offended by vehicular death and injury. Elon Musk and Tim Cook have strong beliefs that might sustain them in introducing radical shifts in our thinking and behaviours.
Comments
Where have I been deathly silent on this thread? And what the hell is inflammatory about suggesting that Apple sometimes leaks to the media? I'm surprised anyone here finds that shocking.
The iMore show is on YouTube.
So some random YouTube channel is an credible media source?
(sigh)
Where have I been deathly silent on this thread? And what the hell is inflammatory about suggesting that Apple sometimes leaks to the media? I'm surprised anyone here finds that shocking.
Yes, Apple occasionally leaks the dates and times of media events to Jim Dalrymple who comments with a simple "Yep."
That's about the nature of Apple's deliberate leaks, stuff that doesn't matter.
Remember, this is company where confidential projects are draped in black cloth for transport on their own campus between secured labs.
I didn't say you are silent on this thread, I just noted that you clam up real quick when you are called out to prove your points.
Well, let's put this to the test.
Please provide evidence that Apple intentionally leaks meaningful material to the general public.
You talk the talk, let's see you walk the walk. Show us the money.
I’m sorry, why are we still repeating this nonsense when we have proof the cars are just for mapping?
I think Tesla is doing a great job developing an electric car. The problem I see isn't with Tesla, but with Tesla's power to evoke radical change as a whole. We need charging stations to be as common as gas stations, as well as the charging to be much faster. I believe if Apple got into this business it would help push the envelope in this area.
Note, CarPlay is not supported by Tesla, and I have to imagine that Tesla owners are probably very keen on Apple's products. Seems excessive to think Apple is making a car because of that or Apple is "leaking" they will compete with Tesla just to get CarPlay support, but I also can't help but wonder that if I was running Apple and what looks like a long-term future for the automobile was starring me in the face and it wasn't allowing me to enter, I might want to develop a strategy to change that.
Lately?
You don't think the miles driven might be a factor?
Ah so because you can't stand podcasts, or ones you deem "poorly made" they're just to be discredited. Got it. Whatever. I stand by my statement that if Apple wanted these car rumors to die down they could easily make it happen.
Now you're putting words in my mouth. When did I ever say meaningful material? But if you want some examples:
Last year there was a rumor that Apple was going to release a new ?TV in March. We got a "nope" from Jim Dalrymple. I think it's pretty obvious who that "nope "came from.
In August John Gruber said:
Again seems very obvious where that information came from.
I wish them well.
Until they can overcome the problems inherent to electric cars, they won't achieve the extensive market they have with their mobile devices.
Some problems with electric cars:
1. Total mileage is very limited compared to fossil fuels. You need to be able to do 400 or 500 miles on a charge.
2. Charging takes ages. When you can charge in three minutes, it'll be comparable to gas.
3. The battery is extremely heavy and bulky. This means that boots are tiny.
4. The battery has to be replaced frequently at great expense and time. No such problem with gas.
5. Where do you charge your car? In the UK, at least, this is very limited. Forget charging at home. A large proportion of people live in apartments and leave their car on the street. To my mind, this is the biggest obstacle to electric cars—there is no infrastructure, nor any easy way to solve that problem. This is why charging times need to come down to five minutes or fewer.
6. Electric cars are much more expensive than normal ones. Total overall lifetime cost, as well as initial cost, is still much higher than for equivalent gas cars. There is virtually no market for them, save for small city cars, though they have become less visible in London in the past few years.
One would expect Apple to build the most attractive electric car that you could wish for. If anyone can make them popular, they surely can. However, transforming the infrastructure is a monumental undertaking that is out of their hands. The only way to solve the charge problem, to my mind, is to hugely reduce the charge time. It sounds, from the recent rumours, that Apple are concentrating on battery tech.
I'd love an electric Apple Car; I guess Cook and Ive like a challenge!
"Here's to the crazy ones."
But why leak this stuff now? I don't get it.
Top creative talent after awhile get bored of doing iPhone, after iPhone, after iPhone. Maybe this is a way to keep top talent from leaving and also a way to attract more top talent from other companies to Apple. When you get as big as Apple, talent retention becomes one of your biggest, if not biggest problem.
Now you're putting words in my mouth. When did I ever say meaningful material? But if you want some examples:
Last year there was a rumor that Apple was going to release a new ?TV in March. We got a "nope" from Jim Dalrymple. I think it's pretty obvious who that "nope "came from.
In August John Gruber said: (speculative stuff about NFC which had been widely rumored, given the presence of Touch ID).
Again seems very obvious where that information came from.
Nope on both scenarios; neither instance proves that Apple fed these two information.
Many of us here have previously called you out before on your inability to provide suitable evidence for your inane "theories" and now you are finally reacting, although ineptly.
Remember, most rumors end up being false, so if Dalrymple says "nope" to any given Apple TV rumor (or any other Apple-related rumor for that matter), he will most likely be correct.
That's why Dalrymple's "yeps" are amusing. They are usually correct, but almost exclusively for points that are essentially meaningless, like media event dates, most of which are restricted to certain timeframes and dates anyhow based on fiscal quarters, development cycles, etc.
Gruber has a more confident public demeanor, but it doesn't mean he knows anything more than any other hack. Touch ID had already been around since the iPhone 5S, so it is only logical that Apple would be working on NFC payments (which had been widely rumored for months prior to the iPhone 6/6 Plus launch).
Dalrymple is essentially a reporter; he doesn't speculate much. Gruber is a blogger, he speculates all the time.
You are going to have to do better than that, Rogifan. You're not an *ANAL*yst like Gene Munster.
Your posts are not just viewed by skepticism by me. Others have also taken you to task, and you have never shown any real ability to stand by major points that you make in these forums. You have devalued your own voice based on your inability to back up what you write.
Worse, you are reacting poorly to highly pointed criticism, and offering even more atrocious responses.
But hey, feel free to go nuts. Or you can just shut down, just like you usually do at some point.
Your call.
1) Did I say I can't stand podcasts. I suppose if you edited my comment to read, "Honestly, I can't stand any […] podcasts," it would read that way, but that would be disingenuous on your part. As I clearly stated, I'm not a big fan. There are only a couple I listen to, and even those are sparingly.
2) I'm not saying that there isn't truthful or good information in the podcast, but show me a podcast that doesn't already have all the relevant info about tech rumours in an article. Chances are they are just speculating on what they read.
3) Again, the statement you stand by is fucking ridiculous because it's obvious Apple could leak info if they wanted. The difference is there is no evidence to support your absolute claims that they do or your myopic view that Apple should let us know about all rumours that aren't true, which would then mean all they don't denounce are true. Remember when they used to send cease and desist letters to websites for posting images of unreleased products? I do, and I'm guessing they stopped doing that years ago for very simple and obvious reasons.
Seems a bit harsh.
And yes, those are all in order.
I know, I can let my emotions get the best of me.
I wish them well.
Until they can overcome the problems inherent to electric cars, they won't achieve the extensive market they have with their mobile devices.
Some problems with electric cars:
1. Total mileage is very limited compared to fossil fuels. You need to be able to do 400 or 500 miles on a charge.
2. Charging takes ages. When you can charge in three minutes, it'll be comparable to gas.
3. The battery is extremely heavy and bulky. This means that boots are tiny.
4. The battery has to be replaced frequently at great expense and time. No such problem with gas.
5. Where do you charge your car? In the UK, at least, this is very limited. Forget charging at home. A large proportion of people live in apartments and leave their car on the street. To my mind, this is the biggest obstacle to electric cars—there is no infrastructure, nor any easy way to solve that problem. This is why charging times need to come down to five minutes or fewer.
6. Electric cars are much more expensive than normal ones. Total overall lifetime cost, as well as initial cost, is still much higher than for equivalent gas cars. There is virtually no market for them, save for small city cars, though they have become less visible in London in the past few years.
One would expect Apple to build the most attractive electric car that you could wish for. If anyone can make them popular, they surely can. However, transforming the infrastructure is a monumental undertaking that is out of their hands. The only way to solve the charge problem, to my mind, is to hugely reduce the charge time. It sounds, from the recent rumours, that Apple are concentrating on battery tech.
I'd love an electric Apple Car; I guess Cook and Ive like a challenge!
If you applied to Apple when Steve Jobs was around I guess he would have taken one look at you and booted your behind all the way back to Britain
wow - If most Brits are as positive about overcoming obstacles as you are its no surprise very few companies got started in Britain
Your post sounds like a list of excuses not to do anything.
Some of the ridiculousness of the post you quoted are…
At first it just sounds like someone who isn't thinking it through, but then the level of detail for the idiocy tells me it has to be blatant trolling.
So.... Smoked baloney..?
If Apple isn't going to make a car, they should say so. If for no other reason than to stop all the perpetual motion inventors from beating on their door...
You're way off base on gruber. I read all his posts, tweets, and listened to all his podcasts. The origin of the "joke" stuff was his sarcastic comment about some other crappy android watch, that it would be funny if it didn't even come out before apple's. For whatevwe reason people inferred that he knew when it was coming. He didn't and said so. He's stated time and time again that he has little birdies but that Apple itself doesn't leak to him special secrets, just early review models like everyone else.
So you can remove gruber from your list.
In fact, the one thing that keeps me wishing Apple is building a car is because of how much opportunity there is to make this industry work because of the gains had by moving to an all-electric automobile. Of course, my wishful thinking has a lot more to do with getting the infrastructure designed so that it can be built up with ease (see ?Pay), particularly a way that a battery can be recharged — not replaced — within 10 minutes.
These all-electric cars are incredibly simple in comparison to the current automobiles with combustions. I forget who used the term on these forums, but they referred to the Tesla as solid-state. While not completely accurate, I do think it's a great term for a tech forum to help get the idea across of the advantages that will be had with electric autos.
That's the frame, with suspension, tires, batteries and motors right there. To me, that's beautiful with a future-forward elegance, so I can understand why people want Apple to get into this business.
I agree with your points here. Electric vehicles are in the news basically because one man and one (small) company had the fortitude to build an electric only (high-performance) production car. I can only imagine how much Apple would contribute to the art... and Musk would welcome Apple to the game. This is right for Apple. Musk has had to walk a very fine line in every aspect of the design and implementation of his electric vehicles. How clever to start with a body built be a recognised high-end (and at the time, probably struggling) marque and then migrate to their own vehicle, brilliant. The outward appearance has had to match design expectations (with the low plan, Tesla could have gone for a more space efficient cab-forward design) and prove a point in performance. Again, brilliant execution. As on-the-road infrastructure improves, with the increasing uptake of electric vehicles, standardisation in some aspects of design could be introduced such that batteries for different manufacturers could be swapped out in a single facility, something that might take seconds to minutes. Musk wants every component to be recyclable. Recycling battery chemicals etc could lower costs dramatically. Those familiar with his goals for SpaceX would understand this. (My understanding is that he is already more cost efficient with systems built in the US than the Chinese.)
I hope the Tesla succeeds and that big money comes to the game. I hope too that autonomous vehicles succeed and that motor vehicle deaths become rare. I believe that people who've contributed most to the safety built into vehicle design are those who were most offended by vehicular death and injury. Elon Musk and Tim Cook have strong beliefs that might sustain them in introducing radical shifts in our thinking and behaviours.
All the best.